Magically held and auto-kill. MElee only??

[garhkal]

This is a question someone has over on DF right now.

By both 1st and 2nd edition, if someone is magically held, asleep or the like and combat is NOT raging on, they can be auto slain one a round. If combat's still going on, its auto hit for double damage..

Now, if say combat's not going on, someone was magically held, could someone do that auto kill, say from a crossbow or short/longbow? Or is it melee only?
If YOU SAY yes to "it can be a missile weapon", what of if it was a mage casting a Magic Missile on the victim??

[Lyrwik]

I can't think of a specific rule on this (I think the coup de grace rule might have been introduced in 3rd ed), but to me it makes sense that the instant kill should be available for a melee weapon, but less likely for a ranged weapon. The rationale being that if the person is unconscious/fully restrained/completely helpless, there should be no difficulty in lining up a knife with their throat/other vital spot. However, even a stationary target can be difficult to hit in just the right spot with a bow/crossbow/other ranged weapon.

As for ranged magic attacks, I'd also be inclined to say no. There might be some spells which could reasonably be used for an instant kill, but on the whole no, since most aren't really targeted to vital points, they just cause damage all over. In the case of magic missile I would say no. Given that it hits its target perfectly every time, if it could instantly kill someone who is restrained (by hitting just the right spot), then it should be able to do that every other time as well, since it's always perfectly aimed and ignores the targets defences.

[garhkal]

Fare enough. As a linked q.. IF someone was magically held (paralyzed) and got targeted by a lightning bolt/fireball, should they still get a save to take 1/2 damage, as there's no way they can dodge it?

[Halaster-Blackcloak]

Garhkal wrote:

By both 1st and 2nd edition, if someone is magically held, asleep or the like and combat is NOT raging on, they can be auto slain one a round. If combat's still going on, its auto hit for double damage..

I never liked the vagueness of the rule, it doesn't make a lot of sense (though I generally use it simply for the sake of not wanting to bother with it). For example, let's say there's a battle going on. One of the PCs is paralyzed or magically held. The other PCs each have two villains they're fighting. Another two villains make their way over to the paralyzed/held PC. If there is no immediate danger of being attacked, the villains should be able to simply kill that paralyzed PC. It makes sense that if there is still battle going on, the villains will ignore held, unconscious or paralyzed PCs in order to deal with more immediate threats - assuming their buddies need help or assuming that they can't afford to turn their backs to the enemy. But in the case above the other PCs are far enough away, and engaging 2-on-1 with other villains, that the villains attacking the paralyzed PC are under no threat and so they can simply slay him. The other 4 villains don't need help - it's 2-on-1 against the PCs.

That being said...

Now, if say combat's not going on, someone was magically held, could someone do that auto kill, say from a crossbow or short/longbow? Or is it melee only?
If YOU SAY yes to "it can be a missile weapon", what of if it was a mage casting a Magic Missile on the victim??

I can see it going both ways. The argument would be that up close, you can slit his throat with a knife or stab him in the heart. You literally can't miss. With a missile weapon, you can still miss. Say you're firing an arrow. You might not have a good angle to shoot from, the wood of the shaft may be slightly off, perhaps the wind is strong. There are ways you can miss with a missile weapon, whereas you can't possibly miss with a melee weapon.

On the other hand, it is a stationary target, so why not just aim for the throat or heart with a missile weapon? Why would it miss when the victim is not moving? A stationary target (for someone with skill) is almost impossible to miss at normal ranges. At 20' with a moving human-sized target, I can shoot a center of mass body shot with pretty much dead certainty. But I couldn't possibly aim for his right eye and hit it. If he was tied to a chair and therefore immobile, the latter wouldn't be hard at all.

With magic missile, it can't possibly miss anyway, but the spell does say that specific body parts can't be singled out, so I'd say no. He will hit for sure, but the wizard can't control whether the missiles hit the body (meaning lots of the damage is absorbed by the armor) or a throat shot.

[Halaster-Blackcloak]

Garhkal wrote:

Fare enough. As a linked q.. IF someone was magically held (paralyzed) and got targeted by a lightning bolt/fireball, should they still get a save to take 1/2 damage, as there's no way they can dodge it?

Here I'd say no. They can't dodge or avoid it. A saving throw is all about trying to avoid damage. Since the held victim can't try to avoid the effect, he shouldn't get a saving throw.

[Lyrwik]

Garhkal wrote:

Fare enough. As a linked q.. IF someone was magically held (paralyzed) and got targeted by a lightning bolt/fireball, should they still get a save to take 1/2 damage, as there's no way they can dodge it?

Here I'd say no. They can't dodge or avoid it. A saving throw is all about trying to avoid damage. Since the held victim can't try to avoid the effect, he shouldn't get a saving throw.

I'd generally agree, unless I thought the saving throw was more from some sort of natural resistance rather than from the ability to dodge/avoid the damage. For example, a save vs poison is more to do with the body's natural resistance which has built up through years of adventuring and exposure to poisons, while a save from a fireball is more to do with the ability to dodge/position oneself to expose less skin to the blas. However, I can also see that that can be getting into territory of decisions which could appear arbitrary to players, if there aren't clear guidelines.

[garhkal]

Garhkal wrote:

By both 1st and 2nd edition, if someone is magically held, asleep or the like and combat is NOT raging on, they can be auto slain one a round. If combat's still going on, its auto hit for double damage..

I never liked the vagueness of the rule, it doesn't make a lot of sense (though I generally use it simply for the sake of not wanting to bother with it). For example, let's say there's a battle going on. One of the PCs is paralyzed or magically held. The other PCs each have two villains they're fighting. Another two villains make their way over to the paralyzed/held PC. If there is no immediate danger of being attacked, the villains should be able to simply kill that paralyzed PC. It makes sense that if there is still battle going on, the villains will ignore held, unconscious or paralyzed PCs in order to deal with more immediate threats - assuming their buddies need help or assuming that they can't afford to turn their backs to the enemy. But in the case above the other PCs are far enough away, and engaging 2-on-1 with other villains, that the villains attacking the paralyzed PC are under no threat and so they can simply slay him. The other 4 villains don't need help - it's 2-on-1 against the PCs.

I think the reason the designers (both for 1e and 2e) wrote it that way was to prevent auto kills DURING combat..